INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNO V A T ION (IJRSI)

ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |V o lume XII Issue XI November 2025

Assessment of The Degree of Conformity of Existing Land Use

Patterns of Calabar Metropolis with the 1973 Calabar Urban Master

Plan

Obongha, Ukpali E.; Bassey, Obasesam C.; Mfah, Christian N.

Department of Urban and Regional Planning, University of Cross River State, Nigeria

DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.51244/IJRSI.2025.12110027

Received: 21 November 2025; Accepted: 28 November 2025; Published: 03 December 2025

ABSTRACT

Land use conformity with the master plan of any urban environment is critical as it encourages spatial segregation

of activities leading to environmentally sustainable developments. This study assessed the difference between

the existing land use patterns of Calabar Metropolis and the 1973 Calabar urban master plan. This was done by

postulating a null hypothesis that there is no significant difference between the existing land use patterns of

Calabar Metropolis and the 1973 Calabar urban master plan. The study adopted a survey design method with

qualitative and quantitative approaches. Qualitative approach involved a combination of interviews and

questionnaire administration and weighted on the Likert Scale while quantitative approach used data obtained

from map analysis on X₁and X₂variables depicting existing land use patterns and the 1973 Calabar urban Master

plan. The One-Way ANOVA was applied in the test statistic and the result showed a significant relationship.

This result pointed to the fact that there is no controlled development in Calabar Metropolis because the planning

authority has been handicapped without facilities needed to function optimally. The study therefore,

recommended for strengthening of the planning authority as well as urgent review of the master plan.

Key Words: ANOVA; Conformity; Controlled development; Existing land use patterns; Likert scale; Map

analysis; Master plan.

INTRODUCTION

Land use conformity is simply the degree to which two or more land uses, such as residential, commercial, and

recreational for example, coexist as zoned in the master plan without a significant negative impact on each other

and the residents (Cengiz, 2013). Land use conformity brings about functional segregation, in that one land use

type such as residential has a positive impact on the other, for example, commercial land use as indicated in the

zoning ordinance of the master plan. Non-conforming land use on the other hand, could be seen as the use to

which a particular land is put, as opposed to the use designed in the zoning ordinance of the current master plan.

In the earliest days of zoning all uses were classified very simply by a “hierarchy of uses” into three major

districts or zones such as residential, commercial and industrial or manufacturing (Cengiz, 2013). Residential

uses included living areas with a few other essential facilities such as churches, schools and depots. Facilities

allowed in the residential zones were also permitted in commercial zones. Manufacturing was a catch-all for

every kind of use including manufacturing, commerce and housing for the low-income people who could not

afford to live elsewhere (Cengiz, 2013; Duany and Tallen, 2002).

Non-conforming land uses also exist in African cities such as Cairo, Johannesburg, Pretoria, Kisii, Nwanza, Dar

Salaam, Abuja, Kano, Lagos, Port Harcourt, Umuahia and others. In the city of Cairo, Egypt for example, zoning

regulation is enshrined in the master plan with establishment of strong institutions that monitor compliance with

the master plan and controlled development. The Tourism Development Authority (TDA) for example, monitors

all developments related to tourism while the New Communities Development Authority (NCDA) monitors all

residential and institutional developments. Other developments for example, industrial and commercial also have

their respective agencies. These agencies are answerable to the Town Planning and Engineering Department

who gives planning permits for all development and redevelopment activities. Despite all these agencies

Page 286

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNO V A T ION (IJRSI)

ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |V o lume XII Issue XI November 2025

monitoring and controlling physical developments, non-conforming land uses exist in patches as relics of

historical and cultural districts that predated their respective zoning regulations (Ahmed and Abd-Elkawy, 2020).

In Kisii city of Kenya, according to Omollo (2019) Kisii got its master plan in 1972 and by 2005 after thirty-

three years, there were serious distortions in the zoning regulation of the 1972 master plan that resulted in

injurious and non-conforming land uses. However, currently, these non-conforming land uses coexist between

one and the other. In Abuja, Nigeria, for example, non-conforming land uses exist in the Federal Capital Territory

(FCT). Studies have shown that the Abuja Master Plan was prepared in 1970 and the central area was designed

by a Japanese Architect, Kenzo Tange to accommodate all the land uses including residential, institutional,

administrative, commercial, industrial, recreational, and circulation. Non-conformity of land uses was obvious

in the late 1990s despite demolition exercises embarked on by the then Minister of the FCT between 1999 and

2007. The Abuja Master Plan of 2008 was also established as a review of the 1970’s master plan (Nor, 2017).

This review was done basically to curb non-conforming land uses which are still in existence. Reports have

shown that the present Minister of the FCT has earmarked and named for demolition several zones of non-

conforming land uses in the FCT.

Other Nigerian cities such as Kano, Lagos, Port Harcourt, Owerri, Umuahia, and Enugu have experienced series

of demolition exercises by successive governments in order to reduce the impact of non-conforming land uses

and distortions of their master plans. Ibrahim and Mai, (2020); Godswill, Nnaemeka, and Ukachukwu, (2017)

have shown that institutional decay (especially among institutions and agencies responsible for urban land use

administration), lack of political will and administrative deficiencies in enforcing compliance with their

respective master plans are some of the factors responsible for persistence of non-conforming land uses in

Nigerian cities.

In Calabar Metropolis, some of the insensitivity in urban land use planning has led to some patterns of land use

antagonism. Non-conforming land uses seem to exist in all the neighbourhood zones of Calabar Metropolis. For

example, within the spectrum of what is generally defined as a particular land use such as a residential zone, is

often interspersed with pockets of other uses which are remnants of socio-cultural land use practices, especially

in the old unplanned neighbourhoods of Calabar Metropolis. In some of the neighbourhoods of Calabar

Metropolis, land use may be chaotic and serious efforts may have to be made to clearly discern the types and

sub-types. The difficulty here lies in the fact that the parameters to be used in delineating the sub-types may be

spatially invariant and as such, not sufficiently discriminatory as to produce distinctive classes (Obongha, 2024).

This happens because institutions responsible for land use planning lacks political will resulting in non-

compliance with the existing master plan particularly by those with political power.

From the foregoing, it is obvious that land uses in Calabar Metropolis are inappropriately intermixed with

residential zones and without compliance with the Calabar urban master plan of 1973, and as such, have

destroyed the aesthetics of the city landscape. Non-conforming land uses are sometimes, potential health hazards.

There are several negative effects documented by many studies for converting one land use type to the other as

well as destroying the urban milieu (Foreman, Reineking, and Hersperger, 2002). Decisions on land uses can

have profound consequences – both positive and negative, subject to the views and values of the affected

residents. This study attempts a deep examination of critical issues on land use pattern in a city of a developing

country, Calabar Metropolis, Nigeria.

The study is however, aimed at assessing the difference between the existing land use patterns and those

contained in the 1973 Calabar urban master plan. This aim was achieved by testing a null hypothesis that there

is no significant difference between the existing land use patterns of Calabar Metropolis and the 1973 Calabar

urban master plan

The Master Plan

According to Kumar (2017) the master plan is a comprehensive plan that integrates various aspects of planning

such as land use, housing, transportation, infrastructure, and development control. The comprehensiveness of

the master plan, therefore, embraces all aspects which are necessary to improve the socio-economic

characteristics and quality of life of the people. The master plan is multidisciplinary in nature and encompasses

Page 287

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNO V A T ION (IJRSI)

ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |V o lume XII Issue XI November 2025

thoughts and practices from the social sciences, economics, geography, urban planning, environmental sciences,

engineering, architecture and surveying. The master plan is a long-term document that maps out development

for future, as well as clears out the vision for perspective year of a city. The master plan focuses on rational use

of the land and utilized optimally for the various activities that take place in a city. The proposals for a master

plan development are usually environmentally sustainable and based on inclusive planning. The master plan

concept however, encourages spatial segregation of land uses and clustering of similar land uses.

The master plan includes ideas from all sections of people in the community in its development proposals and

focuses on the following principles: (i) affordability (ii) restrictions on ecologically sensitive areas (iii) heritage

sites and traditional build up areas and gives special norms for such areas and (iv) balanced growth of the city.

The master plan emphasises zoning and prevents concentration of injurious land uses/activities in a particular

location. It takes into account appropriate distribution of facilities, infrastructure, networks, housing, and follows

neighbourhood concept development. The master plan is an instrument to work out land and infrastructure

requirements for various urban and rural areas, and allocate land for various uses to result in harmonious and

sustainable distribution of activities so that towns/cities are provided with a form and structure within which

they can perform all their economic and social functions efficiently and effectively. The purpose of a master

plan is to promote growth, guide and regulate present and future development of towns and cities with a

perspective of 20-25 years (Kumar, 2017).

The Hampshire Planning Commission (2021) lists the characteristics of the master plan as follows: (i) physical

plan: the plan as a fundamental guide to the physical development of the city; (ii) long ranged activities involving

long term planning; (iii) comprehensiveness encompassing all the functions that make a city work, such as

transportation, housing, land use, utility systems, and recreation. In addition, the master plan provides (iv) the

interrelationships of functions; (v) a guide to decision making for the planning board, the governing board and

mayor or manager; (vi) a statement of public policy which translates community values, desires, and visions into

land use and development principles that can guide the future growth of the city.

The master plan has been modeled by the researcher from the New Hampshire Planning Commission as shown

in Figure 1.0. The model explains various dimensions and elements of the master plan including its impact on

urban land use planning and the socio-economic characteristics and improvement of life of the residents of a

particular city. Its comprehensiveness also includes population projection and economic activities performed by

the residents. It integrates long term and multidisciplinary programmes.

Figure 1.0: Model of the master plan concept

Source: Modelled from the Hampshire planning commission

Page 288

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNO V A T ION (IJRSI)

ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |V o lume XII Issue XI November 2025

In the application of the master plan for sustainable urban land use planning, Neamtu (2011) conducted a study

in Romania using two methods. Firstly, interviews were conducted with 25 Town Planners working for the city

council. Secondly, a number of 40 master plans were accessed in order to assess whether they meet the principles

and objectives of sustainable development. The results of the study showed that majority of these master plans

were prepared without involving the stakeholders from within the community and not also synchronizing with

the national or regional plans. There were also elements of the verbal policy plans which seem to be unusual.

This is so because they represent a drastic departure from the urban plans and contain very few or no statistical

data and maps. Rather, they basically focused on a vision statement and strategic objectives of the city.

Kasala (2015) conducted similar research on the return to master planning in Dar es Salaam, East Africa. The

study applied two methods. First, researcher reviewed secondary data which comprises many years of Dar es

Salaam strategic/structure plans. Second, the researcher interviewed professionals in the academia, planning

institutions, local authorities, and NGOs with a questionnaire. The result of the study showed that several master

plans of Dar es Salaam were prepared and were never implemented. Failure to implement the mater plans

resulted in the introduction of alternative approach to planning, known as Strategic Urban Development Planning

(SUDP). The study concluded that the SUDP was eventually returned to master planning due to misconceptions.

The return persisted in the sense that the key stages of SUDP which include introduction, plan formulation,

content determination and interpretation into actions were done in the context of laws and procedures of the

master plan.

Nallathiga (2016) investigated the role of Master Plans in city development in India, using the methodology of

systematic reviews. The concepts and methods of traditional master planning in India owe its origin to British

town planning laws. The importance of master plans has primarily been confined to the aspects of land use

planning, physical infrastructure, and development control. The study by Nallathiga (2016) highlighted the role

of master planning to include a design for the physical, social and economic development of the city, and also

to improve the quality of life as well. The master plan performed functions as follows: (i) to guide the

development of the city in an orderly manner so as to improve the quality of life of the people, (ii) to organize

and coordinate the complex relationships between urban land uses, (iii) to chart a course for growth and change,

(iv) to be responsive to change and maintain its validity over time and space, and be subject to continual review,

(v) to direct the physical development of the city in relation to its social and economic characteristics based on

comprehensive surveys and studies on the present status and the future growth prospects, and (vi) to provide a

resource mobilization for the proposed development works.

Uncontrolled developments taking place in Calabar Metropolis have raised several professional concerns as to

whether there is an existing master plan which guides development or not. In 1973, the administration of U. J.

Esuene saw the need for Calabar urban master plan and engaged TESCO-KOZTI Consulting (Nig.) Ltd., a town

planning firm based in Hungary but with office in Calabar, Cross River State, Nigeria. The Calabar urban master

plan was to address some key areas such as effective land use planning. It was also to overcome the challenges

of development control with emphasis on demographics and socio-economic characteristics of the residents.

Other details of the master plan were to include population and land use projections to the year 1998. It was

proposed that the master plan would be reviewed after twenty-five years, from 1973 to 1998. However, the

proposal of the master plan terminated at the present-day Army Junction (welcome to Calabar) and other new

zones such as Ikot Effangha Mkpa, Ikot Eneobong, Ikot Omin and Ikot Ekpo were not captured in the Calabar

urban master plan of 1973. In 1998, the Calabar urban master plan was not revised due to frequent changes in

administration during the Military era.

In 2000, the then Governor of Cross River State invited a team of indigenous Town Planners to revisit and review

the Calabar urban master plan of 1973. A contract was awarded and projections were made to 2020. Some of the

important areas to be revised were: the relocation of the Watt Market and the Margaret Ekpo International

Airport. The proposal to relocate the Watt Market, for example, brought about tension within Calabar Metropolis

to the point that the Efik women came out nude to protest the relocation plan. Their argument was that the

location of Watt Market at the present position was ancestral and all of them including their ground parents were

born to meet the Watt Market at that present location.

Page 289

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNO V A T ION (IJRSI)

ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |V o lume XII Issue XI November 2025

Unfortunately, the 2000 Calabar urban master plan policy document has been reported missing and could not be

found or traced in the Ministry of Lands, nor in its affiliates such as the Departments of Town Planning and

Surveys. Now, it is the 1973 policy document that is available in the Town Planning Department of the Ministry

of Lands. But this document does not cover the present Calabar Metropolis. In 2012, the then Governor of Cross

River State made attempt to review the 1973 and 2000 Calabar urban master plans and renamed it the Greater

Calabar Master Plan (to cover all parts of Calabar Metropolis including Ikot Effangha Mkpa, Ikot Omin, Ikot

Eneobong, and Ikot Ekpo). The government engaged the Canadian Pacific Consulting Services (CPCS) and

made commitment to the tone of 1,200,000,000.00 USD for the project (Obongha & Bassey, 2025). CPCS

commenced the plan preparation and made public hearing with several presentations to the Officials of Cross

River State Government, professional bodies, and the general public. Regrettably, the administration that took

off from May, 2015 failed to follow up with the Greater Calabar Master Plan project despite several push from

the Town Planning Professionals and the CPCS. On January 24, 2018 the Governor inaugurated an eight-man

task force on development control leaving the Town Planning Professionals idle and redundant. The task force

was to handle development control, based on the observed distortion of the master plan which was going on at

a very fast rate, and that people were building houses without approved plans. Others were erecting industrial

buildings in residential zones, building residential accommodation in flood plains and without respecting the

building lines between highways, roads and clearance as stipulated in the Federal Highway Codes (Obongha &

Bassey, 2025).

Despite this observation, the 2015-2023 administration brought development control to a halt, land use planning

virtually ceased, and many open spaces left as green areas in the 1973 and 2000 master plans were built up. In

fact, the administration injected so many counterpart agencies into land use planning, many of which were non-

professionals which allowed any form of development at any location, whether conforming or non-conforming.

Demolition exercises which used to be conducted by the Directors of Town Planning in the previous

administrations could no longer take place in Calabar Metropolis (Obongha & Bassey, 2025). Public/institutional

lands such as the University of Cross River State, Calabar Campus experienced over thirty per cent of its land

being built up by invaders (Obongha, 2024). The year 2000 Calabar urban master plan recommended for a review

after 20 years (that is in 2020) but, was not reviewed despite efforts by the previous administrations to review

the master plan and renamed it “Greater Calabar Master Plan” even before the year 2020. The failure of the

2015-2023 administration to follow up with the Greater Calabar Master Plan resulted to haphazard physical

development without control in Calabar Metropolis (Obongha, Ukam & Inah, 2024). A critical examination of

the Calabar urban master plan as compared to the existing land use patterns of Calabar Metropolis has not been

carried out and, therefore, becomes a gap which this study is meant to fill up.

MATERIALS AND METHOD

This research employed the survey design method. The survey design method took both qualitative and

quantitative approaches. The qualitative approach involved the use of focus group professional interviews and

questionnaire administration for qualitative data collection and description. The quantitative approach involved

the use of scaled measurements which considered the following: (i) GIS-based mapping and (ii) bivariate

analyses of variables on land uses. The bivariate analyses of land use were done, using a One-Way ANOVA

analysis. The analysis was to determine whether there is a difference between the master plan and the existing

land uses of Calabar Metropolis. Two methods were employed for data collection, namely: (i) Map analysis of

the spatial area (m²) of land uses zoned in the Calabar urban master plan and the existing land uses and (ii)

administration of a structured questionnaire.

Map analysis: an existing land use map of Calabar Metropolis was obtained from the Cross River State

Geographic Information Agency. From the map, major land uses were identified and compared with the Calabar

urban master plan of 1973. Both the existing land use map and the Calabar urban master plan were critically

studied and compared for the purpose of identifying similarities and differences in land uses. Map analysis was

complimented with empirical verification of features on the landscape using Google Earth Imagery and

reconnaissance survey to establish the functional relationship between the two maps using the linear planimeter

(Roser, Leiborici, and Jackson, 2011).

Page 290

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNO V A T ION (IJRSI)

ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |V o lume XII Issue XI November 2025

The linear planimeter is a standard measuring tool/instrument in the field of Urban Planning, Cartography,

Geography, Land Surveying, Architecture, and Engineering which is used in determining euclidean

distances/spatial area, demarcating boundaries and parcels of land on a map ((Roser, et al., 2011). The usefulness

of the linear planimeter to this study cannot be overemphasized. Its measurements were taken, using the map

scale and represented in metres. Likewise, a questionnaire was also used in this study. The questionnaire was

designed using responses on a Likert scale to measure land use patterns and compliance with the Calabar urban

master plan. It contains questions with options such as Strongly Agreed (5 points), Agreed (4 points), Strongly

Disagreed (1 point), Disagreed (2 points) and Undecided (3 points).

The questionnaire was used to collect qualitative data which complimented data from measurements carried out

using the linear planimeter. Data obtained from the administration of the questionnaire were not used in testing

the hypothesis, rather were used for description of evidence-based information on incongruous land uses in

Calabar Metropolis.

The respondents were heads of household. The respondents were sampled from the total households of Calabar

Metropolis with a sample size of 494 household heads. The population was 630,628 people. In this study,

households were used as the sample frame. An average of six (6.0) people is officially accepted as household

size in Nigeria (National Bureau of Statistics, 2021). Therefore, an average household size of six people from

the total population of 630,628 people, making a total number of 105,105 households was used for the study.

Data Analysis

The Calabar Urban Master Plan and existing land use patterns

Table 1.0 showed data on land use types, location and area of coverage (m²) as depicted in the Calabar urban

master plan of 1973 and the existing land use patterns of Calabar Metropolis of 2023. The variables are the

Calabar urban master plan (X₁) and the existing land use patterns of Calabar Metropolis (X₂).

Table 1.0: Area (m²) of land uses depicted in the Calabar urban master plan and the existing land use

patterns of Calabar Metropolis

S/No

Land use

Type

Location

Calabar urban master Existing land

plan area (m²) (X₁)

area (m²) (X₂)

1.

Residential

Akim Qua Town

Big Qua Town

Duke/Cobhom Town

Ediba Qua Town

Efut Abua

50,300

20,250

21,800

38,599

29,600

29,750

41,890

29,120

32,550

22,670

58,990

20,800

22,900

39,900

30,750

40,300

41,900

30,300

54,600

22,700

Efut Anantigha

Efut Ekondo

Efut Uwanse

Ekorinim 1 and 2

Esin Ufot

Page 291

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNO V A T ION (IJRSI)

ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |V o lume XII Issue XI November 2025

Essien Town

Henshaw Town

Ikot Ansa

27,900

32,678

41,800

22,670

40,480

34,150

32,700

43,900

45,700

46,500

55,900

50,200

42,500

714,690

Ikot Effanga Mkpa

Ikot Ishie

Ikot Omin

Mbukpa

49,300

29,580

560,937

Nyahasang

Total

2.

Commercial

Watt Market

1,256

867

96

1,600

1,050

107

110

189

87

Marian Market

Ishie Market

Akim Market

101

122

Mbukpa Market

Ikot Omin Market

Ikot Ansa Market

Bacoco Market

Atakpa Market

Uwanse Market

Goldie Market

Abasi Obori Market

Beach Market

98

112

76

65

54

88

120

113

117

77

Anantigha Market

Edim Otop Market

Nyahasang Market

Total

2,442

3,800

4,063

3.

Industrial

Northern Estate

501

Page 292

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNO V A T ION (IJRSI)

ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |V o lume XII Issue XI November 2025

Southern Estate

Jonathan by-pass

Total

3,500

7,300

411

517

1,429

4.

Institutional

Federal/State

Secretariats

4,784

6,590

4,550

4,300

1,021

1,450

2,650

3,982

28,790

3,500

900

1,104

6,100

4,400

4,200

1,000

1,400

2,600

3,082

22,260

3,350

600

Army lands

Navy lands

Police lands

Fire Service lands

Prison lands

Immigration/Customs

lands

Hospitals land

Higher education land

Airport land

1,850

64,367

877

Cultural Centre

Water Board land

Total

50,973

5.

Cemeteries

Ikot Ansa

Goldie

1,200

1,090

1,659

1,200

1,090

1,650

950

Hawkins

Etta Agbor Layout

Essien Town

Total

800

3,949

5,690

6.

Open Space

Stadium

Ishie

800

20

900

15

Akim

14

10

Page 293

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNO V A T ION (IJRSI)

ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |V o lume XII Issue XI November 2025

Federal Housing Est.

State Housing Estate

Millennium Park

Big Qua

128

114

150

11

103

77

150

10

Mbukpa

13

10

New airport

Ikot Ansa

3000

12

3,000

09

Gulf Club

15

10

Henshaw Town

Total

08

4,302

4,307

7.

Wetlands

Anantigha

Akai Effa

Idundun

Bacoco

37,670

28,550

23,750

22,800

112,770

756,067

12,627

11,301

12,408

12,330

48,666

829,818

Total

= Neighbourhood zones and land uses not contained in the 1973 Calabar Urban Master Plan

Source: Researcher’s Field Survey, 2025.

With the data set in Table 1.0, the hypothesis formulated was however, tested. The Table 1.0 showed missing

data in some neighbourhood zones that were not contained in the master plan as well as some land uses that were

not in the master plan. Therefore, for the purpose of valid results, normality test was conducted on the data in

Table 1.0 and made use of five data sets in each land use zone such as residential, commercial, industrial,

institutional etc. for both existing land use patterns and the Calabar urban master plan for testing hypothesis one

with the One-way ANOVA. The One-way ANOVA, for example, is used to estimate how the mean of

a variable changes according to the level of an independent variable. One-way ANOVA was used because this

study wants to know how an independent variable, in combination, affects a dependent variable. In the

hypothesis stated above, the land uses zoned in the 1973 Calabar urban master plan and the existing land uses of

Calabar Metropolis in 2023 were compared. ANOVA is mathematically expressed as:

2

F = S₁/S₂

………………….………………………………………..……... eqn. 1

The assumptions/conditions of the One-way ANOVA showed that:

 The dependent and independent variables should be continuous.

Page 294

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNO V A T ION (IJRSI)

ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |V o lume XII Issue XI November 2025



The populations (independent variable) from which the samples were obtained must

or approximately distributed.

be normally

 The variances of the population must be equal and

The groups must have the same sample size.



If these assumptions are not satisfied, the result that is gotten from the One-way ANOVA may not be valid.

The hypothesis was tested using the One-way analysis of variance (ANOVA). The Calabar urban master plan

(X₁) as the independent variable and the existing land use patterns (X₂) as the dependent variable. The Test result

is presented on Table 2.0. The Table 2.0 showed that the existing land use patterns of Calabar Metropolis in

2023 and the land uses depicted in the 1973 Calabar urban master plan are statistically different. F values were

highly positive at 0.001 level of significance. This is because 0.001 is ≤ 0.05 confidence level at 95.0 per cent

confidence interval. Therefore, it has been established that the result showed a statistically significant difference

between the existing land use patterns of Calabar Metropolis and the Calabar urban master plan (Table 2.0).

Table 2.0: One-way ANOVA between the Calabar urban master plan and the existing land use patterns

Source: Researcher’s data analysis, 2025.

The levene’s test of equality of error variances or the homogeneity of variance was used to test the assumption

that variances were equal across groups or samples. From the Table 3.0 P-value of 0.001 ≤ 0.05 confidence level

(based on the mean and median which implied that the assumption of equal variance across groups) was

significant. The homogeneity assumption of variance was not met which implied the variances were significantly

different from each other. Nevertheless, this assumption did not impede the progress to analysis of variance,

using the P-value of 0.001 (Table 3.0).

Table 3.0:

Page 295

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNO V A T ION (IJRSI)

ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |V o lume XII Issue XI November 2025

The result was also illustrastrated with the ANOVA plot (Figure 2.0). The ANOVA plot showed the estimated

marginal means that represent the difference between the existing land use patterns of 2023 and the Calabar

urban master plan of 1973. The slope of the plot pointing upward explains the land area (m²) in which the existing

land use patterns have not complied with the prescriptions of the Calabar urban master plan. This difference has

also been demonstrated in Figures 3.0 and 4.0.

Table 4.0:

Table 5.0:

Page 296

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNO V A T ION (IJRSI)

ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |V o lume XII Issue XI November 2025

Table 6.0:

Scheffe post hoc test of multiple comparison in the above table shows there is significant difference between

residential and commercial, institutional, cemeteries, open space and wetland in the first row (p < 0.01)

Page 297

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNO V A T ION (IJRSI)

ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |V o lume XII Issue XI November 2025

Figure 2.0: ANOVA Plot showing estimated marginal difference between the master plan and the existing land

use patterns of Calabar Metropolis

Source: Researcher’s data analysis, 2025.

The analysis in Figure 3.0 was derived from Table 1.0. It is a graphical representation of the land use zones

depicted in the Calabar urban master plan and the existing land uses. Figure 5.0 showed the land area used up

by the existing land use patterns of Calabar Metropolis and the direction of extension towards the wetlands.

800000

700000

600000

500000

400000

300000

200000

100000

0

Land use zones

Calabar urban master plan area

Existing land area

Figure 3.0: Bar graph derived from Table 1.0 showing the land area of the master plan and the existing land

use zones.

Source: Researcher’s compilation, 2025.

Page 298

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNO V A T ION (IJRSI)

ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |V o lume XII Issue XI November 2025

Responses on compliance with the Master Plan/existing land use patterns

Table 7.0 showed responses on the Likert scale in compliance/non-compliance with the Calabar urban master

plan. The Table 4.0 showed responses on land use development with a corresponding five (5) options on the

Likert scale which explained the degree of acceptability of the observed urban land use development in

compliance with the Calabar urban master plan. The five (5) options on the Likert scale include the following:

strongly agree (5 points); that is if the respondents strongly agreed with applicability of the observed land use

development as not in total compliance with the master plan. Agree (4 points); that is if the respondents merely

agreed with the applicability of the observed land use development as not in compliance with the master plan.

Strongly disagree (1 point); that is if the respondents were not totally in agreement with the observed land use

development as not in compliance with the master plan. Disagree (2 points); if the respondents were not in

agreement with the observed land use development due to non-compliance with the master plan and undecided

(3 points); if respondents were those without any meaningful judgement on the observed land use development

or had no idea with the master plan.

The Likert scale measured whether flood plains in Calabar Metropolis have been developed for residential

housing and other land uses. About 152 respondents strongly agreed, 136 respondents agreed, 89 respondents

strongly disagreed, 106 respondents disagreed, and 11 respondents were undecided making a total of 494

responses. Respondents who strongly agreed to all questions on the Likert scale make up (25.30 per cent), those

that agreed (24.53 per cent), strongly disagreed (17.54 per cent), disagreed and undecided were (20.70 per cent)

and (11.90 per cent) respectively. However, the average percentage mean response on the Likert scale is 32.12

per cent.

The Likert scale is mathematically expressed as:

R₁₁= ⅀W∕AN (0≤ R₁₁≥1) …………………………………………………… eqn. 2

Where: R₁₁= Relative importance index

⅀ = summation

W = weight given to each factor by the respondents (1-5)

A = highest weight (in this study 5)

N = sample size (in this study 494)

However, R₁₁falls within the range of zero to one (0-1) making it possible to compare opinions. Therefore, the

benchmark for deciding the significant score is 0.05 as such values ≥ 0.05 are considered not significant while

values ≤ 0.05 are significant. Responses on the Likert scale are considered as qualitative in this study and were

not tested further.

Table 7.0: Responses on the Likert Scale concerning compliance/non-compliance with the Calabar urban

master plan

Responses on land use

development

Scoring Method

Strongly

Agree

Strongly

Disagree

Disagree Undec Total

ided

Mean

Flood plains are being 152

136

89

106

11

494

327.6

developed

residential/other uses

for

(760)

(544)

(89)

(212)

(33)

(1638)

Page 299

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNO V A T ION (IJRSI)

ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |V o lume XII Issue XI November 2025

Wetlands sand-filled for 42

settlements

45

157

(157)

24

152

(304)

32

98

494

229

(210)

(180)

168

(294)

96

(1145)

494

Locations of some open 174

375.2

markets

conforming

are

such

not

as

(870)

(656)

(24)

(64)

(288)

(1878)

Atakpa, 8 Miles and Abasi

Obori/Goldie

Some cemeteries not in 158

compliance with the master

plan

137

96

88

15

494

338.2

245.8

(790)

(548)

(96)

(176)

(45)

(1691)

Many public institutions 44

are adjacent injurious land

53

106

182

109

494

(220)

(212)

(106)

(364)

(327)

(1229)

uses such as University of

Calabar/Airport

Residential

interspersed

industries

areas 175

with

141

59

64

55

494

358.2

367.6

(875)

(564)

(59)

(128)

(165)

(1791)

Recreational land uses are 151

183

36

57

67

494

inadequate

interspersed

and

with

(755)

(732)

(36)

(114)

(201)

(1838)

educational uses such as

stadium and state library

Reserved open spaces are 217

built-up by the affluent

example, State housing

193

49

33

2

494

395.6

289

(1085)

(772)

(49)

(66)

(6)

(1978)

Non-conforming land uses 95

are frequent in Calabar

126

105

143

25

494

(475)

(504)

(105)

(286)

(75)

(1445)

Metropolis

Public land uses are often 99

96

111

89

99

494

293

encroached

residential/industrial

by

(297)

(495)

(384)

(111)

(178)

(1465)

example, UNICROSS and

Water Board

Many cultural areas have 69

been destroyed such as

Cultural centre complex

57

121

178

69

494

251.4

(345)

(228)

(121)

(356)

(207)

(1257)

Total

1,376

25.30

1,335

24.53

953

1,124

20.70

646

5,434

100

3212.4

32.12

Percentage

17.54

11.90

Source: Researcher’s compilation from Field Survey, 2025.

Page 300

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNO V A T ION (IJRSI)

ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |V o lume XII Issue XI November 2025

250

200

150

100

50

0

Strongly Agree

Agree

Strongly Disagree

Land uses

Disagree

Undecided

Figure 5.0: Bar graph derived from Table 7.0 showing responses on compliance with the Calabar urban master

plan in the Likert Scale

Source: Researcher’s compilation, 2025.

The Table 7.0 was used to generate Figure 5.0, a bar graph which showed that 1,376 (25.30 per cent) represents

responses on strongly agreed to all the observed land use developments not in compliance with the master plan.

1,335 (24.53 per cent) responses agreed to all the observed land use developments not in compliance with the

master plan. 953 (17.54 per cent) responses strongly disagreed and 1,124 (20.70 per cent) responses disagreed

to all the observed land use developments not in compliance with the master plan. 646 (11.90 per cent) responses

were undecided. The questions were all tailored towards illegality and non-compliance with the Calabar urban

master plan. All land use developments are represented in different bars (Figure 5.0).

DISCUSSION

The null hypothesis, which sought to know whether there is a significant difference between the land area zoned

for residential use, commercial use, industrial use, institutional use, open spaces, cemeteries and wetlands in the

Calabar urban master plan and the currently existing land area (Table 1.0). The result, therefore, accepted the

alternative hypothesis (Hi) which states that there is a significant difference between the existing land use

patterns of Calabar Metropolis and the Calabar urban master plan. This means that land allocated to some uses

in the Calabar urban master plan were found to be different from the currently built-up land uses (physical

development) of Calabar Metropolis. The One-way ANOVA (Tables 2.0 and 3.0) was the test statistic used in

this analysis. It showed a statistically significant relationship and goodness of fit in the data sets, with p-value of

0.001 level of significance ≤ 0.05 level of confidence. This result was also proven by producing different

statistical plots, such as the estimated marginal difference plot (Figure 2.0), bar graph (Figure 3.0) and existing

spatial patterns of Calabar Metropolis in a map (Figure 4.0). They were meant to show the difference between

land area of the master plan and the land area of the existing land use patterns of Calabar Metropolis.

The Likert scale (Table 7.0) was also used qualitatively to compliment the result from the test statistic. Responses

on the Likert scale measured whether there is compliance with the master plan from current land use development

in Calabar Metropolis. These responses indicated that the master plan has been altered (Figure 5.0). The

professionals were also interviewed separately and their responses confirmed a significant variation in the level

of current physical developments from the prescription of the master plan.

The implication of this result is that there is no controlled development in Calabar Metropolis. The prescription

of the master plan has not been followed strictly, and there are no strong institutions to monitor/control

Page 301

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNO V A T ION (IJRSI)

ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |V o lume XII Issue XI November 2025

development. The Town Planning Department has been sidelined over the years from controlled development

and in urban land use administration. For example, many land uses contravened the master plan. These land uses

include the following: cemeteries at Etta Agbor layout, and Spring Road; conversion of open spaces in the State

Housing Estate to residential plots; building of gasoline stations in a high-class residential zone (such as the

Federal Housing Estate); and conversion of wetland zones meant for urban agriculture to residential and other

developments.

In order to determine the degree of conformity of existing land use patterns of Calabar Metropolis with the

Calabar urban master plan empirical verifications were also sought. The results pointed to the fact that current

developments in Calabar Metropolis violated the prescriptions of the master plan. However, Nallathiga (2016)

pointed out that the role of the master plan is to control both physical and economic developments; direct land

uses and improves the quality of lives of the residents. This study, therefore, showed a deviation from these roles

performed by the master plan as a result of unguarded developments. The observation of Hersperger, et al.,

(2015) that land uses contravening the master plan have resulted to conflicts and development of nuisances,

criminalities, and aesthetic disappearance. These incidents were seen in the result of this study where land uses

developed in contravention with the master plan have produced several nuisances that are aesthetically

unpleasant to the residents of Calabar Metropolis.

A study by Tudor, et al., (2013) found that cemeteries are non-conforming with residential zones. In the Calabar

urban master plan, three cemeteries were zoned at Ikot Ansa (north), Goldie (central), and Hawkins (south) but

this study also found two cemeteries existing at Etta Agbor layout and Spring Road, Essien Town zone.

Therefore, these two cemeteries found are regarded as non-conforming land uses. The result, therefore, a

confirmation of the segregation component of the ecological theory which emphasized the need for separation

of antagonistic land uses and the association of conforming land uses (Park, 1950).

CONCLUSION

 There is need to strengthen institutions responsible for land use administration and development control.

This would help to reduce the rate of contravention with the Calabar urban master plan.

 There is need for urgent review of the 1973 Calabar urban master plan.

 The Planning Authority should be empowered to monitor development and redevelopment in order to

ensure that land uses are developed and distributed according to the design in the master plan.

REFERENCES

1. Ahmed, A. & Abd-Elkawy (2020). Types and tools of land use zoning towards towards dealing with

private properties in replanning inner informal areas: Case study: Maspero Triangle Cairo Governorate.

American Scientific Research Journal for Engineering, Technology and science, 77 (2): 1-37.

2. Cengiz, A. E. (2013). Urban Land Uses in Ecological Sense: An Example of the City Centre of Canakkle.

Journal of Faculty of Agriculture at Ataturk University, 42(1): 79-89.

3. Duany, A. & Tallen, E. (2002). Transact Planning. Journal of American Planning Association, 68(3):

245-266.

4. Godswill, O. C., Nnaemeka, O. A., & Ukachukwu, A. G. (2017). Property development and land use

planning regulations in Nigeria, International Journal of Environment, Agriculture and Biotechnology, 2

(4): 1694-1707.

5. Hersperger, A. M. (2006). Spatial Adjacencies and Interactions: Neighbourhood Mosiacs for Landscape

Ecological Planning. Landscape and Urban Planning, 77(4): 227-239.

6. Hersperger, A. M., Ioja, C., Steiner, F., & Tudor, C. A. (2015). Comprehensive Considerations of

Conflicts in the Land Use Planning Process: A Conceptual Contributions. Carpathian Journal of Earth

and Environmental Sciences, 10 (4): 5-13.

7. Ibrahim, S. K., & Mai, M. M. (2020). Effect of contravention of building regulations on the quality of

built environment in Nigeria's urban centres: A case study of Kano Metropolis. LAUTECH Journal of

Civil and Environmental Studies, 4 (1):

143-151.

Page 302

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF RESEARCH AND SCIENTIFIC INNO V A T ION (IJRSI)

ISSN No. 2321-2705 | DOI: 10.51244/IJRSI |V o lume XII Issue XI November 2025

8. Kumar, Z. (2007). Modeling land use and land cover change in the Strzelecki Ranges. Proceedings of

International conference on modeling and simulation (MODSIM07), Christchurch, New Zealand, 1328-

1334.

9. Nallathiga, R. (2016). Assessing the role of master plans in city development: reform measures and

approaches. Nagalock 37 (16): 1-18.

10. National Bureau of Statistics (2021). Population and households in Nigeria: The structure of Nigeria's

economy. Abuja, NBS.

11. Nor, C. J. (2017). Complexities of land use planning and Nation's building in Nigeria's new capital: City

of Abuja. An unpublished Ph.D. Thesis submitted to New Castle University, UK.

12. Obongha, U. E. (2024). Analysis of non-conforming land uses in Calabar Metropolis, Cross River State,

Nigeria. Ph.D. Thesis submitted to the Graduate School, University of Cross River State, Nigeria

(unpublished).

13. Obongha, U. E., Ukam, L. E., & Inah, S. A. (2024). Evaluation of residential neighbourhoods compliance

with the zoning of 1973 Calabar urban master plan. Journal of the Nigerian Institute of Town Planners

(NITP), 30 (1): 135-146.

14. Obongha, U. E. & Bassey, S. I. (2025). Domestication of the urban and regional planning law in Nigeria:

The Cross River State Experience. Journal of the Nigerian Institute of Town Planners 30 (4): 35-44

15. Omollo, W. O. (2019). Conformity assessment to development plan implementation as a tool for

development control in Kisii Town, Kenya. South African Journal of Geomatics, 7 (3): 331-344.

16. Roser, J. F., Leiborici, D. G., & Jackson, M. J. (2011). Rapid Flood Inundation Mapping Using Social

Media, Remote Sensing and Topographic Data. International Weekly Journal of Science, 6(5): 103-120.

17. Tudor, C. A., Ioja, I. C., Hersperger, A. & Patru-Stupatiu, S. (2013). Is the residential land use

incompatible with cemeteries? Assessing the attitudes of urban residents. Carpathian Journal of Earth

and Environmental Sciences 8 (2): 153-162.

Page 303